(Avoid subjective writeups... er, I mean, Avoid writing writeups after your OS crashes and you're still angry =)

Microsoft Windows has had a rather interesting history, filled with good and bad moments.

Currently, Windows derivatives are the most popular workstation/desktop operating systems on "IBM-compatible" hardware (that is to say, "PCs").

There have been four major "forks" of Windows:

  • Windows 1.x-3.x: Practically, these were graphical shells for MS-DOS with 16-bit API (Win16).
  • Windows 9x (Windows 95, Windows 98 & 98SE, Windows ME): "Integrated" (read: swept under the carpet) the DOS, added a kluged-on but mostly working filesystem (VFAT and later FAT32), featured a much better API that was fully 32-bit (Win32). Still unstable, fortunately not as badly...
  • Windows NT: Entirely different beast. Mostly stable, no DOS on the background, fully 32-bit. Evolved into Windows 2000 and later to Windows XP, with "home" and "professional" versions, the "home" version intended to replace the 9x series. These things are finally starting to look like an operating system!
  • Windows CE, used on PDAs, embedded systems and game consoles (well, in a couple of Dreamcast games, even though many other OSes were more popular on that platform).

Windowses are, as indicated by name, based on GUI. On "desktop" Windowses (that is, non-CE), there have been some "styles": Windows 1.x had its own, so did Win2.x, and Win3.x's style was also used in earlier WinNT versions (3.x). Windows 95 introduced a new GUI style that also came to NT 4, and the style further evolved in Win98 and 98SE. The latest GUI style is "Luna", used in WinXP, and is finally trying to catch up with Linux window managers what comes to themability.

Windows OSes are more or less easy to learn and use. The UI is similar to other UIs in market (particularly, similar to MacOS). They are good for various purposes in "home use", and some people also use them for serious work, more or less without curses.

My personal experience is that Windows 9xes are pretty nice OSes - when they work. When they don't, they just don't provide enough feedback on what's wrong. =( They are also somewhat too unstable for anything "serious". (I hope Windows XP will be of some help - I'll revise this viewpoint when they start selling XP with student prices.) However, I've noticed that what comes to video and sound editing, Windows is better than my favorite OS, and hey, most games come for Windows...

For hacker purposes, Windowses are not that nice - the development tools don't come with the OS, and as I said, not much of what's happening under the hood can be seen easily. OSes that come with source are much more fun to tinker with.

Each Windows copy comes with nice set of feature-limited but usable apps. Legendary applications include Write/Wordpad, Paintbrush/Paint, Microsoft Internet Explorer and, of course, Solitaire and Minesweeper, the applications most business users value most.

Of course, there's a reason why the apps that come with Windows are so limited - Microsoft is already practically Deep In Trouble for bundling MSIE and Windows Media Player with the operating system, and if they would ship more of applications of that grade integrated with OS, their antitrust case would look much bleaker for them.

(I'm okay with this and understand the reasons - but for me, it just isn't practical that I would need to buy an expensive OS and then bunch of very expensive applications to deal with my creativity. So, I use other OSes for most part...)

There have been many claims that Microsoft is not playing fair with the OS sales:

  • Marketing strategies are questionable. With these prices, no one is willing to upgrade the OS, so copies are force-sold on OEM market - Microsoft makes exclusive selling contracts with hardware sellers to include copy of Windows with every sold hardware package.
  • Microsoft Internet Explorer comes with Windows 98 and later, integrated to the UI; this hinders the acceptance of other web browsers (like those from Netscape). Also, there have been similiar schisms problems with MSN and AOL, RealPlayer and Windows Media Player, and others.

The OSes tend to be rather unstable and require considerable amount of processor speed to work, compared to other OSes...

Personally, I can only say that Microsoft is getting better and better at making OSes. Too bad every other OS vendor is lightyears ahead, and MS is trying some nasty tricks to get more foothold.

Anagram: "Microsoft Windows" <=> "Wisdom? Or swift con?" I think it has a bit of a both =)

(This node was written in MSIE from Windows 98SE, but only because I'm doing some video work =)

See also: